I'm saying that the number of international wars has decreased, ie, the number of times one country has attacked another country is less in the last 70 years than, say, from 1800 to 1950. I think this is due to increased military ally networks in the world since WWI.
Ukraine is winning for as long as Putin doesn't succeed. As long as Putin doesn't forcibly take over the government of Ukraine, they are winning. If they're able to limit the number of towns the Russian army will bomb to the ground and civilians they murder, they're winning. Again, the Russian army can stop their invasion at any time to save both the lives of Ukrainians and Russians.
I honestly don't know much about this region, but the people of Donetsk and Lugansk want to succeed from Ukraine then I would support that. With nearly no knowledge of the history, if Ukraine invaded Donetsk and Lugansk and took away their rights that's clearly wrong. I don't see how the Russian army bombing their cities into dust and murdering the citizens actually helps the people of those regions now though.
Your opinion that Putin just wants a land bridge to Crimea definitely sounds plausible. I haven't heard that opinion before so thanks for sharing that. Personally I'm not sure if trying to march on Kyiv, turning cities to dust and murdering civilians is better than developing ports in places like Sochi, but again, I really don't know much about any of this so I'm sure there are many factors I'm not understanding.